| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
More evidence of the absence of a dividing line within Islamic communities in the West between peaceful Muslims and jihadists -- and of the dangerous implications of that absence. Note that the burqa-clad women identified themselves as the "only true believers of the Koran." Yet official Washington, Western European authorities, and the media worldwide continue to ignore such assertions, and to pretend -- and call upon all people to pretend -- that within Islamic communities worldwide there is a clear and prevailing understanding that such people are not "true believers," but in fact heretics, excoriated by the majority of Muslims. We hear all the time how "Wahhabism" is a newly-minted, anti-traditional form of Islam. But where is the evidence for these assertions? The only thing untraditional about the Wahhabis is their extravagant taste for takfir, or the declaration of other Muslims as heretics and apostates. What no one wants to face is the fact that Wahhabism shares with all other Muslim groups the idea that Muslims must wage war against non-Muslims in order to establish the hegemony of Islamic law. This is not a tenet of "radical" Islam, but of traditional Islam.
"How a Town Became a Terror Hub: Belgian Haven Seen At Heart of Network," from the Washington Post, with thanks to Jerry Gordon:
MAASEIK, Belgium -- The phones at city hall began ringing nonstop one morning last year when several masked figures were spotted walking through the cobbled streets of this pastoral town. A small panic erupted when one of the figures, covered head to ankle in black fabric, appeared at a school and scared children to tears.It turned out the people were not hooded criminals, but six female residents of Maaseik who were displaying their Muslim piety by wearing burqas, garments that veiled their faces, including their eyes. After calm was restored, a displeased Mayor Jan Creemers summoned the women to his office.
"I said, 'Ladies, you can be dressed all in Armani black for all I care, but please do not cover your faces,' " Creemers recalled. "I tried to talk to them about it, but it was impossible. They said, 'We are the only true believers of the Koran.' "
What the city elders did not know at the time was that the women came from households in which several men had embraced radical Islam and joined a terrorist network that was setting up sleeper cells across Europe, according to Belgian federal prosecutors and court documents from Italy, Spain and France.
Over the next nine months, Belgian federal police arrested five men in Maaseik, a town of 24,000 people tucked in the northeast corner of Belgium. Each was charged with membership in a terrorist organization, the Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group, a fast-growing network known by its French initials, GICM.
With each arrest, investigators uncovered fresh evidence that placed small-town Maaseik at the center of a terrorist network stretching across Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. The town had served as a haven for suspects in the Madrid train explosions that killed 191 people in March 2004, for instance, as well as an important meeting place for the GICM's European leadership.
Read it all.
Posted by Robert at November 24, 2005 8:33 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Welcome to your new world, old Europe.
For years your leaders supported the "palestinians" in their war with Israel, essentially helping to keep them on welfare in seething refugee camps (young Zarqawi too), and now the war is not only at your doorstep but in your house.
And your new residents have contempt and derision for you.
Call in draft dodger leftist Bill Clinton, and maybe he will help resolve the conflict for you.
Posted by: dgene![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at November 24, 2005 9:45 AM
(postscipt): maybe he'll charm the women right out of their burkas
Posted by: dgene at November 24, 2005 9:48 AM
"This is not a tenet of "radical" Islam, but of traditional Islam." Traditional islam is the trojan horse for "radical" islam.
at November 24, 2005 10:58 AM
Dr. Evil from the Austin Powers flicks is from Belgium. I don't think he'd appreciate these Islamic crackpots messin' up the works in his homeland.
Time to unveil the "Laser".....
Posted by: DCWatson at November 24, 2005 11:52 AM
IT IS FRIGHTENING SEEING NINJA TURTLES LIFESIZE!
Remember my first encounter with a burqa in Penge, Londistan. This near 6ft tall female [maybe it was Bin Ladin in drag}dressed in this huge black tent with angry black eyes only showing, strode into the Bakery loudly demanding something in a foreign tongue....Her companion, a wretched undersized girl [possibly a slave or poor relation] translated and carried all the items out in her spindley arms. Rest of customers
stood gobsmacked including myself as Madam Burka ignored the queue and DEMANDED PRIORITY....
at November 24, 2005 12:20 PM
Sorry folks - spelling error
ought to read' LONDONISTAN'
at November 24, 2005 12:25 PM
Morgane, did they give her priority? Did they let her go to the front of the line, that is? My first reaction would have been, h*ll no. But then I thought of the poor salesgirl, and the fear of beheading. I believe these creatures of Satan capable of a beheading for not being allowed to the front of the line.
Posted by: nichtdhimmi at November 24, 2005 12:27 PM
I'm not quite old enough to be having an "elder moment", but it seems to me that appearing in public with no parts of the face visible except for the eyes was, not so long ago, against the law in some western jurisdictions as balaclavas and pantyhose became the masks of choice for bank robbers.
I'm not suggesting that these particular women have or were contemplating criminal actions themselves(though I have read of Muslim women talking about the "burqa advantage" if they are engaged in adultery), but the adoption of such garb provides great cover for jihadists who wish to smuggle bombs, etc.. It has happened in Israel and it's likely only a matter of time before it happens in the West.
Posted by: waterdragon52 at November 24, 2005 12:42 PM
On that point Imperial College have implimented the same ban on hoodies (coats worn with the hoods up, often over a baseball cap, designed to conceal the face while up to no good) and extended it to the veil. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4463058.stm
Which extension is hedged about with qualifications about "sympathetic compromise" towards religious headgear, one suggestion is that veiled female will have to reveal themslves whenever challenged to a female member of staff (could be fun). But which shows a realisation of the damage that could be done.
What I hated seeing last week was a school party forming up for headcount at a central london station last week. This is the first school party I have seen since 7/7, before that there one be one every morning that I travelled. They were aged about 7/8/9, an age group where the required adult child ration is quite high and thus a lot of mums had volunteered for escort duty. It was a mixed class, over half of the women wore hijabs, several wore full face veils. All credit to them for accompaning the class as trips cannot take place without enough adults, but how can a child relate to an adult who is so shrouded.
Miss, I feel travel sick.
Well sit here next to Mrs Mohammed then.
And Mrs Mohammed cannot smile reassuringly at him. She can nod her head but is it a sympathetic nod? Even if he knows that she is the mother of Ahmed in his class, and Hussein in the year above, and Aisha in the year below, and co-mother (half mother? step mother? polymummy?) of Ali and Zainab and Hassan how can she relate to children? When 70% of communication is non verbal, and children are so sensitive.
Not to mention that in the UK everybody who works with children, even voluntary stuff like helping at your child's school has to be police checked. How do you know who is under that shroud?
at November 24, 2005 1:34 PM
I hadn't checked the jihadwatch site for a day or so, and when I read some of the articles this morning, I knew, when I saw the telltale asides about how this isn't a Leftist problem and how this isn't a general cultural problem driven by Leftism, that Spencer was back:
For example, for the myopia concerning the intimate relationship between peaceful Muslims and jihadists, Spencer blames "official Washington, Western European authorities, and the media worldwide" -- as though there aren't millions of ordinary Westerners (who are intelligent and mature enough not to be brainwashed by the "elites") who also think that way; and as though it is some generally amorphous osmosis of our sociopolitical stratosphere that is the problem without reference to the behemoth elephant in the room, PC Leftism.
Another of Spencer's asides -- "the ever-stifling politically correct lockstep in the mainstream media (both left and right)" -- conveys the impression that both left and right in the media are equally responsible for this lockstep, when the situation is that the right in the media are kowtowed and inhibited from moving out of that lockstep by the dominant PC culture in the West. And that dominant PC culture was created by, and is daily nourished by, the Left.
In one aside, there was a crumb from Spencer: "The Left... believe fervently that Israel is the aggressor against an innocent and aggrieved Palestinian people". However, my ellipsis contains a dilution of that crumb (soggy turkey stuffing): "...and, of course, many others -- including some of the Arabic-speaking Christians with whom I am in daily contact..." That dilution may be further broken down into "many others" (which doubtlessly includes all those on the right who are equally responsible for myopia concerning the problem of jihad) and "Arabic-speaking Christians" whose myopia has more to do with the quasi-dhimmitude of living among dominant Muslims than it does with the problem of PC Leftism in the West. It is Spencer's "many others" which, again, obscures the arguable fact that these non-Leftist others who remain stubbornly myopic are that way because of the dominant PC culture in which they have to operate (or, more gravely, because they have, somewhere along the line, drunk the PC Kool-Ade).
at November 24, 2005 1:58 PM
Morgane,
I thought the English didn't tolerate queue jumpers? I would have more than happily told to wait her turn. In the crumbling Dominion
where I live, it's now quite common to see prepubescent girls wearing hijab. But of course, we don't make a fuss as we invented multiculturalism.
at November 24, 2005 2:07 PM
"This is not a tenet of "radical" Islam, but of traditional Islam." Traditional islam is the trojan horse for "radical" islam.
The "nice Muslims" are the force multiplier of the violent Jihadist Muslims. Force multiplier via their demographic Jihad and quiet approval.
Posted by: dennisw at November 24, 2005 2:35 PM
Sorry folks - I know the old British system of queuing is nearly sancrosant but this BURKA BABE GOT PRIORITY! Guess the manager thought it was the lesser of two evils as the dame spoke no English and frightened looking girl only spoke a little - they would have been there all day otherwise....Probably a Saudi official's wife if
female : 'she' sure was a big gal and looked like she could pack a powerful punch. [also hide an AK47 under that tent].
at November 24, 2005 2:58 PM
Please forgive me for interrupting this thread but I wish to post this news item today about a young man who was murdered by 3 Muslims. His murderers were sentenced to life imprisonment at the Old Bailey today.
This is the BBC report
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4463142.stm
And this is the report of a London paper
http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/display.var.654410.0.campus_killers_jailed_for_life.php which carries a little more detail.
Note that the BBC calls the men, who bear Muslim names, "Asian". Note also that despite their boasting of having killed a "white" man who had interfered in "Pakistani" business the Judge did not think it was a racially motivated attack. The prosecution could not produce a motive for the murder other than drink. The deceased died from facial injuries, kicked like a football.
The verse of the Koran at Sura 4.47 is surely relevant:-
"O you who have been given the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! Believe in what We have revealed (to Muhammad ) confirming what is (already) with you, before We efface faces (by making them like the back of necks; without nose, mouth, eyes, etc.) and turn them hindwards, or curse them as We cursed the Sabbathbreakers. And the Commandment of Allâh is always executed."
Translation - The Noble Quran of the Dar-us-salam publishing house.
The trial took a month but nothing has been published as to what defence these young men put up. Thankfully, despite (or perhaps because of, some people just will not understand) the lack of acknowledgement of any ideological element convictions were secured and thus the mandatory life sentence was imposed.
This will be of interest to British readers and I hope this is a suitable thread for it to be seen.
Thank you.
at November 24, 2005 3:18 PM
It seems to me that it would behoove the city fathers to outlaw the practice of Islam within their jurisdiction, based on the ample evidence of prior Muslim activity. Failure to do so will be along, slow cultural suicide.
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at November 24, 2005 3:56 PM
The town council of Maaseik decided to forbid covering your face in public. One of the ladies has been fined twice for appearing veiled on the streets but she refuses to pay the fine. meanwhile her husband and his friends are in court for terrorism.They have managed to slow down the court procedure by demanding that the documents be translated from French into Dutch (Maaseik is in Flanders so the language is Dutch). This is crazy as the people involved are Maroccan immigrants. It is also very cynical that a law (the right to be tried in court in your own language) which Flamish people had to fight for is misused to protet foreign terrorists.
Posted by: iloveFlanders at November 24, 2005 5:13 PM
"...the women came from households in which several men had embraced radical Islam and joined a terrorist network that was setting up sleeper cells across Europe..."
Ye shall know them by their (wives') dress.
Posted by: Archimedes at November 24, 2005 5:22 PM
From UP POMPEII BRITISH BLOG - just type this into Google - "Mark Seddon former member of Labours NEC is joining AL JAZEERA and Lauren Booth [Blair's sister in law] is considering doing the same."
Recommend this Blog with great cartoons and lots of info. Cheered to find some of the British are fighting back at last!
at November 24, 2005 5:46 PM
more BS stories, sorry but these medieval folk will last a few more years in europe and will either have to change their religious views or be deported en masse once the hard right revolution takes hold. Thank god for democracy!!!
Posted by: lord lucan at November 24, 2005 10:41 PM
Lauren, (real name Sarah) Booth apparently hates being called Cherie Blairs half sister (although as one article commented she looks well on it) and they do not get on.
They are among the numerous daughters of Anthony Booth the actor (I can only name one role of his, although it was a good one, the "randy scouse git" in Til Death us do Part, a supporting role to Warren Mitchell and Dandy Nicholls)who fits the role of potentate of the harem to a T. Much married (to Pat Phoenix the actress just before her death, must not let her inheritance slip) and plenty of extra mural activity which has resulted in at least one more long lost sister (8 at the last count, Cherie, Lyndsey, Jenia, Bronwen, Sarah (aka Lauren Booth), Emma, Jo, and Lucy) popping up in adulthood.
Shame really.
at November 25, 2005 4:22 AM
Why does that link posted up about the BBC's coverage of a racist murder not surprise me? If it had been three whites attacking an Asian there would have been days of screaming and howling. And to think we have to fork out money to pay for this deceitful lying.
Posted by: londongirl at November 25, 2005 12:41 PM
From the BBC link,
"...Mr. Yate's head was stamped on and he died from multiple injuries to his face."
The "Religion of Peace" strikes again.
Perhaps we should call Islam the "Religion of Pieces", since these people seem to enjoy damaging, destroying and severing the body parts of the people they oppose.
In 2005, I know of no Christian group that advocates ruthless destruction of human beings. But I read everyday how some "Asian" group or individual destroyed somebody's body via suicide bombing, beheading, cutting off hands, mutilation, forced prostitution, etc. And there's the point: Christianity does not advocate an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. It advocates turning the other cheek, loving your neighbor as yourself, doing good to those who wrongfully abuse you. Hard teachings indeed, in light of our human nature, but teachings that have been the hallmark of the Christian faith for two thousand years. As Robert Spencer has shown us, the hallmark of Islam is subjugation, intimidation, humiliation; loss of life, limb and personal faith. Loss of choice and abuse of freewill.
Let's stop kidding ourselves about who and what is behind this enemy who opposes us, calling this "religion" misunderstood, disenfranchised, poor and oppressed. Let's stop calling Islam a religion at all and call it what it is, a satanic death cult bent on destroying everyone who refuses to live in subjugation to a belief system that relegates every man, woman and child on this earth to little more than robots.
But the indication is that even in practice, people who live under Islamic oppression rebel against this mind prison and do things they are not supposed to because the human spirit demands action against tyranny. There is even hope in stories about women caught in adultery being stoned to death. How's that, you say? Because it shows that someone rose above their forced state of mind imprisonment to risk feeling something, to risk being alive, even if only for a few moments, even if it meant certain death if they were found out.
Islam will never feed the human spirit. It wasn't created to do so. But those of us that have enjoyed or even merely tasted freedom, can't go back to a place where it is not available. We have to have more. So the struggle will go on. But I want more for my children that that. I will teach them to fight, but I really don't have to because their own human spirit will call them to action. I just wish it would call to action the fellow traveler's in our midst who search for appeasement rather than victory. They settle for poor scraps and impede our ability to sit at the table, a table that we built.
Stand up and take the war. The Hun is at the gate.
(Kipling)
at November 25, 2005 3:31 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4416988.stm
More from the BBC missed yesterday.
The defence was pathetic. Each defendant blamed the others. It wasn't me that did it - it was him.
Note the BBC emphasis on the killers, their thoughts, their fears of censure for drinking during Ramadam rather than the remorse for killing a decent young man that one would have hoped for. Like the victims of the London bombs, no tribute for that decent young man, whose family have behaved with great dignity.
at November 25, 2005 5:44 PM
hey rose, thanks for that link, as i note from the BBC it's all our fault (white drinking culture).
Maqsood, Bashir and Zulfiqar eschewed their parents' religion and culture - although they paid lip service to it - and chose instead to imitate some of their white peers with frequent bouts of binge drinking."
note the "immitation" of "white peers" which i find offensive as in the UK many races drink alcohol, black, jamaican, african, hindu, christian, chinese. this is typical cynical BBC reporting.
Posted by: lord lucan at November 25, 2005 6:14 PM
further this crime wasnt treated as racist???
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4416988.stm
"Detective Chief Inspector Tony Boxall, who led the inquiry, said the incident was initially treated as a racially motivated attack.
But he said: "Although classed as a racial incident there is no direct evidence it was racially motivated.
"Comments were made (by the killers) which could be perceived as racist but whether it was racially-motivated is something which only the defendants will know."
so " one witness said she heard Zulfiqar saying in Urdu: "We killed the white man."
Another witness overheard them say: "That will teach the white man for interfering in Paki business."
and the police are not treating this as racist??
if i went into a curry house and called everyone there "pakis" i'd be locked up for a few months and these S###s are treated like victims by the BBC and as yobs by the police. i predict a 5 - 7 year sentence, out in 4 yrs!
Posted by: lord lucan at November 25, 2005 6:19 PM
BBC are scraping bottom of the barrel literally - when they aren't arse licking Muslims - a gleeful Guardian reported "BBC now only got 35 % of viewers." Reckon everyone in Britain should demand LICENSE FEE BE SCRAPPED!
Posted by: Morgane at November 26, 2005 12:52 AM
If this can happen in Belgium, why not in the U.S. too. Look at this website www.geocities.com/anti_mcws. It appears to be in its seminal stages but it seems to be making a point about how we don't do enough to prevent terrorism and contain the people who promote these ideologies until it is too late
Posted by: jihad at November 26, 2005 7:14 PM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)